The Future of Transactions: Intent-Based, Not Signature-Based

Users today must micromanage every transaction parameter, from gas to slippage, exposing them to MEV and failed transactions.\n- User-hostile complexity requiring deep protocol knowledge\n- Billions in MEV extracted from predictable execution paths\n- ~30% transaction failure rate on congested networks like Ethereum

Users state what they want (e.g., 'swap X for Y at best price'), not how to do it. Specialized solvers compete to fulfill it optimally.\n- Abstracts away complexity (gas, routing, liquidity)\n- Enables cross-chain atomicity via projects like UniswapX, CowSwap, and Across\n- Inverts the MEV game, turning extractable value into user savings

Intent execution requires a new infrastructure layer of competing solvers and intent-centric mempools.\n- Solver networks (e.g., Anoma, SUAVE) compete on fulfillment quality\n- Shared sequencers (like those from Espresso or Astria) provide execution fairness\n- Intent standards enable interoperability across EVM, Cosmos, and Solana

Delegating execution to a solver network introduces new trust assumptions. The system's integrity depends on solver competition and cryptographic proofs.\n- Relayer risk: Users trust solvers to not censor or front-run\n- Verification overhead: Requires validity or fraud proofs for correct execution\n- Regulatory gray area: Solvers may be viewed as broker-dealers

Smart accounts are the on-ramp for intent-based flows, enabling sponsored transactions, batched operations, and signature abstraction.\n- Paymasters allow gasless transactions, removing a major UX hurdle\n- Bundlers act as primitive solvers, packaging user operations\n- ~50M+ smart accounts projected by 2025, creating the user base for intents

Intents evolve from human-readable commands to machine-driven objectives, powering a network of autonomous agents and DeFi legos.\n- Agent-to-agent commerce for continuous portfolio optimization\n- Composable intents where the output of one becomes the input of another\n- Fully abstracted blockchain experience, rivaling Web2 app simplicity

Anoma isn't an app; it's a protocol for intent-centric coordination. It provides the base layer for intent expression, matching, and settlement.

• Key Benefit: Enables multi-chain, multi-asset atomic swaps without shared liquidity.
• Key Benefit: Its Typhon consensus enables private intent matching, solving MEV and frontrunning at the protocol level.

These protocols retrofit intent-based, MEV-aware execution into existing blockchains like Ethereum.

• Essential: Uses a decentralized solver network to find optimal execution paths, capturing value for users.
• Suave (by Flashbots): Aims to become the preferred execution environment for all chains, keeping MEV value with users/validators.

These DEXs are proving the user experience benefits of intents today, abstracting away gas and slippage.

• UniswapX: Uses a network of fillers to compete for off-chain order flow, guaranteeing prices and paying gas.
• CowSwap: Leverages batch auctions and Coincidence of Wants for MEV-protected, gasless trades.

These protocols treat cross-chain transfers as intents, using competitive solver networks for speed and cost.

• Across: Uses a unified auction where relayers bid to fulfill transfers, resulting in ~1-2 min finality.
• LayerZero: With its OFT standard, enables programmable cross-chain intents, moving beyond simple asset transfers.

The efficiency of intent-based systems depends on a competitive solver network. Dominance by a few solvers recreates the extractive order flow problems of traditional finance.

• Key Risk: Solver cartels could collude to offer worse prices.
• Mitigation: Protocols like CowSwap use batch auctions to enforce uniform clearing prices, limiting solver power.

For intents to become the universal standard, we need a shared language for expression and fulfillment, similar to ERC-20 for tokens.

• Key Benefit: Allows any wallet to create intents readable by any solver network.
• Key Benefit: Enables composability of intents across different applications and protocols, unlocking new use cases.

Intent execution relies on a competitive market of solvers. In practice, liquidity and MEV extraction concentrate power. The result is a new centralization vector where ~3-5 dominant solvers control the majority of cross-chain flow. This creates systemic risk and potential for censorship.

Users sign an 'intent' (a desired outcome), not a transaction. This delegates full control of execution path and logic to opaque off-chain systems. Users cannot audit the route, exposing them to hidden fees, suboptimal pricing, and complex MEV extraction they cannot see or consent to.

Intent standards (like UniswapX, CowSwap) and infrastructure (Across, Socket, LayerZero) create a sprawling dependency graph. Each new intent type adds complexity, increasing the attack surface and integration overhead. A failure in one solver or bridge can cascade, breaking the 'simple' user abstraction.